Slashdot Mirror


Valve Starts Promoting Steam For Linux To Windows Users

An anonymous reader writes "Steam is now being used by thousands of gamers running a Linux OS, and Valve has got to the point where they are happy to start urging Windows users to make the switch. Proof of that comes from a 'Join the Beta' promotion on the homepage of Steam suggesting you try Steam for Linux. There's even a download link to get Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, which removes yet another barrier to entry. With Gabe Newell's clear hatred of Windows 8, this shouldn't be a surprising move. We aren't going to see another version of Windows appear for a few years, so in Valve's eyes pushing Linux to gamers makes a lot of sense."

12 of 474 comments (clear)

  1. Re:annual windows by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    To be fair Valve is the one who was first to promise new versions of their flagship product in shorter periods of time and look what happened! :)

  2. Re:Lunux desktop by cod3r_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hopefully a new era of game dev is upon us. This is not only great for linux, but great for people like myself who only use windows for games. Hopefully the video card makers will beef up their effort writing drivers and software for compatibility.

  3. Big Picture by tepples · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Steam is on the PC team, as opposed to the console team. Especially with Big Picture and the ability to filter for controller-friendly games, Valve seems to have taken a shot at encouraging people to set up a living-room PC instead of a major console.

  4. Call me a skeptic here.... by mark-t · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But I really can't see this being a successful venture.

    I'm not trying to troll, just calling it as I see it.

    Why would people bother with this when they can just play practically all of (if not actually all of) the same games on the windows PC that they already have?

    Their Linux console certainly isn't priced any more economically than a PC, so I'm not sure I see the advantgage as far as the end-user is concerned.

    1. Re:Call me a skeptic here.... by Microlith · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But I really can't see this being a successful venture.

      Why not? Game developers can't be hurt by being given a way to stay independent of any one company. Currently they can play the console vendors off each other, even if the platforms are vendor controlled. On the PC, they've never had anyone but Microsoft.

      Why would people bother with this when they can just play practically all of (if not actually all of) the same games on the windows PC that they already have?

      Because I want a choice other than "Microsoft or no games at all." I'm not alone, apparently.

  5. Re:Why? by cduffy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe, maybe not.

    Windows is still trying to be backwards-compatible with an API and end-user experience that was designed around single-user systems, whereas the UNIXy legacy is from large university systems where users were expected to be hostile (and, frequently, were).

    Security on Windows has been getting a lot better over the last decade and a half, and it's going to continue to get better as Microsoft stops supporting legacy APIs and continues to modify workflows to adjust user expectations, but I'm still not much inclined to accept the assertion that there's no remaining difference that isn't directly and exclusively caused by the delta in marketshare.

  6. Re:Why? by patchmaster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Also, once you get good on Linux the power of having a Unix command line available really becomes a boon. It took me a good year to 18 months of primary use on Linux, but at this point I truly feel more comfortable and efficient in Linux than in Windows.

    This would be a valuable observation if you had first spent 18 months at the Windows command line. Of course, very few people are going to be willing to spend 18 months to get up to speed with using an OS.

    For the expert, the command line is hard to beat for speed and efficiency. For anyone who isn't an expert, the command line is a major hindrance. They do far better with the point and click graphical interface. So I'm not sure better efficiency after 18 months of training is really a big selling point to most people.

  7. Yes, Yes and Yes. by tuppe666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You may not be alone... but do you seriously think that there are actually enough people like you to make this a successful venture?

    ...because the existing demographic(sic) has nothing to do with the future of computing. Android is set to overtake Windows this year as the dominant OS. Right now coding a Windows[Direct X] only game shuts out half of your potential audience, and Windows market share is set to decline further. The future is cross platform and steam is already there? The fact that one market is smaller than another is irrelevant when portability is not an afterthought...if it is Windows is likely to lose out not Linux.

  8. Re:Yawn! by markdavis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They don't get more profit from Linux vs. MS-Windows. But by having a platform that Microsoft can't corrupt or control, it means that Valve can remain relevant and for much longer. That has a great value to Valve.

    It also means Valve can develop a console/set-top using free Linux and pay nothing to MS or any other company to do so. That has a great value to Valve.

    [Real] Linux compatibility could also be a great step to an entry into Android Linux for Valve... the #1 mobile platform in the world. That has a great value to Valve.

  9. Re:Why? by Chryana · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I see that you are being sincere here, so I won't make another sarcastic reply. I just think that stronger arguments than that will be needed to convince people to switch over. The command line is a non starter for most people who have no special interest in information technologies. As for the cost of the OS, it is rather immaterial right now, because few people buy it at retail, so they never see the bill. Finally, I think the gaming crowd is not the best one to cater to for an alternate OS, because
    1. there are not that many games on Linux;
    2. the small community makes it difficult to get support when it doesn't work, for instance sound issues are pretty frequent, at least in my experience;
    3. I have seen some performance issues, but that was a few years ago and the situation may have improved;
    4. Gaming rigs can be expensive, so again, OS price is less of a factor.

    I would expand on these points, but I have to go now. Please accept my apologies, for I will not be able to answer any reply you make to this post in less than several hours, perhaps even until tomorrow.

  10. Re:My experience on ubuntu 12.04 by theskipper · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In your rush to vent your anonymous rage against Linux, you failed to notice one thing. The person you accused of being a "fucking nerd dickhead" for posting the solution (period3)...is the same as the person who posted the problem (period3)...

    Heh.

  11. Re:annual windows by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The release date is 2015, which makes it a standard 3 years per release. Since they have already said ALL versions, not just Pro, will get a full 10 years of support this will allow businesses to skip a couple of releases (as they did by skipping Vista for 7, and are now skipping 8) without losing support while basically using the consumers for the beta testers for the features that will end up in the business friendly odd releases.

    Frankly I don't know why FOSS users would bitch about this since they are basically copying your "odd/even" or "LTS/regular" release concepts. If the reports are correct, which we've seen no indication that they aren't and a lot of evidence (Surface, MSFT stores, MSFT building their own hardware) that they are what you are gonna see with Windows is the same thing Apple users have had with OSX for ages, a $40 a pop upgrade and faster releases because like OSX instead of trying to come up with a shitload of new features to justify a $100-$200 price point they will just add a couple of things to each release and sell more of them on the fast release schedule.

    Personally I don't give a shit as long as the next "LTS Business release" aka Win 9 gives us the choice of getting rid of that damned metro crap in favor of a standard desktop and they make system builders and OEM pricing cheaper and more transparent.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.